Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC MINUTES 09-14-21 MINUTES VIDEO CONFERENCING j TUSTIN PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING SEPTEMBER 14, 2021 6:01 p.m. CALLED TO ORDER. Conducted. INVOCATION: Pastor Aaron Gehlken, Central Baptist Church of Orange County Allp resent. ROLL CALL: Chair Mason Chair Pro Tem Kozak Commissioners Chu, Higuchi, Mello None. PUBLIC CONCERNS: CONSENT CALENDAR: 1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES—AUGUST 24, 2021 RECOMMENDATION: That the Planning Commission approve the Minutes of the August 24, l 2021 Planning Commission meeting, as provided. Hurtado Hurtado confirmed no public input was received for this item. Motion: It was moved by Kozak, seconded by Chu, to approve the Minutes of the August 24, 2021 Planning Commission meeting. Motion carried 5-0. PUBLIC HEARING ITEM: 2. GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT (GPA) 2021-0002 (HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE) APPLICANT: City of Tustin 300 Centennial Way Tustin, CA 92780 LOCATION: City-Wide ENVIRONMENTAL: GPA 2021-0002 is considered a "project" subject to the terms of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Pursuant to the Minutes—Planning Commission September 14, 2021 —Page 1 of 8 CEQA Guidelines Section 15063, the City has completed an Initial Study and prepared a Negative Declaration for the draft Housing Element. REQUEST: GPA 2021-0002 (6th Cycle Housing Element Update) RECOMMENDATION: 1. That the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 4439, recommending that the City Council adopt a Negative Declaration for GPA 2021-0002. 2. That the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 4440, recommending that the City Council approve GPA 2021-0002, updating the Housing Element. Demkowicz Staff presentation given. Higuchi Higuchi's comments included questions about the required amendment to the Tustin Legacy Specific Plan (TLSP) for the additional units that are proposed and if amendments are also needed for the Red Hill Avenue Specific Plan (RHASP) and the Downtown Commercial Core Specific Plan (DCCSP). Demkowicz In response to Higuchi's questions regarding the RHASP and DCCSP, Demkowicz stated that neither of those specific plans would have to be amended being that they have already been approved for a certain number of units. The TLSP, however, would need to be amended. Mello Mello's comments included questions about CEQA and how the Housing Element update is considered a "project", the differences between the planning period and housing element cycle timeframes and which planning period gets credited for projects approved between June 30 and October 15, 2021. Commissioner Mello also asked about the City's plan on utilizing the 120 days from the statutory due date of October 15, 2021 and the criteria in using large and small sites in accommodating housing for lower income listed in the Housing Element Appendix. Mello also asked about Tustin Legacy and the allocation of units within Neighborhood D North and whether or not it was designated for open space or park land at one time and if that designation had changed. Daudt To answer Mello's question regarding CEQA, Daudt stated that the CEQA Guidelines specifically identifies general plan amendments and updates to be subject to CEQA review. It is case law and also implemented guidelines. i Minutes—Planning Commission September 14, 2021 —Page 2 of 8 Demkowicz To answer Mello's question regarding the planning period dates, Demkowicz responded that any projects completed between July 31 and October 15, 2021 would be counted towards the sixth cycle. Willkom Willkom responded to Mello's question indicating the statutory deadline for cities to adopt a housing element is October 15, 2021. Following the Commission's recommendation to the City Council and adoption of the document by the City Council, staff will submit the draft Housing Element to HCD. Following the City's submittal, HCD may provide the City with additional comments or the City may receive a certification of its Housing Element. She Indicated that at that point, the City's Housing Element would be in compliance with the current Housing Element law. The period of 120 days will be utilized to obtain certification of the document from 1 HCD. Demkowicz To address Commissioner Mello's question regarding the criteria for using large and small sites, the revised document includes trends of parcels of both sizes in the surrounding area of Tustin that have been developed. Demkowicz also stated that the City uses the default density for those sites in determining the number of units that can be accommodated. I Willkom To further address Mello's questions, Willkom added that the current TLSP does not allocate or assign residential units to Neighborhood D North. The City is proposing to amend the specific plan and assign 430 units to Neighborhood D North. A portion of Neighborhood D North is envisioned to have some residential units. Mello Mello followed up regarding the conversion of open space and whether or not there would still be open space or green space allocated within that j area. a Willkom Willkom stated that there will be some open space/green space and public places within Neighborhood D North. The amendment to the Tustin Legacy Specific Plan must be completed in three (3) years. At that time, staff will be providing the Commission and the City Council with a concept plan/master plan of the area that demonstrates various land uses including open space and/or public space. Chu Chu stated that she submitted questions to City staff prior to the meeting and she received responses quickly and thoroughly. She thanked Justina and Irma and indicated she did not have any further questions. Kozak Kozak thanked staff and the consultant team for preparing the report and the comprehensive presentation for the Housing Element. He added that the affordability and availability issues were covered. Kozak did not have any specific questions. Minutes—Planning Commission September 14, 2021 —Page 3 of 8 Mason For clarification, Mason asked who the City reached out to (i.e. the community organizations that work with lower income individuals, underserved groups and special needs households, etc.). She also , inquired about the direct outreach to the Tustin community and the number of mailings/emails that were sent. Mason also referred to the second community online survey, and asked if there was a significantly higher engagement due to there also being a Spanish language version of the survey. She also inquired as to next steps once the Housing Element is forwarded to the City Council for submission on October 5, 2021, the next three (3) years and what is expected of the Commission. Demkowicz Demkowicz stated that the City developed an expansive interested party list for the Housing Element update process. Included on the list were specific housing support services groups, service providers, organizations, housing advocacy groups, housing developers within the Orange County area, CDBG providers, outside agency lists which include neighboring cities, utility companies, etc., and others who requested to be added to the list for notification. Altogether, there were approximately 350+ individuals and/or organizations. Additionally, there was an email blast that went out and included approximately 50 individuals on a separate email interested party list. In some cases, individuals listed may have received duplicate notices as hard copies of notices were also mailed via USPS. Post cards were also utilized and mailed to residents, business owners, and community groups. For the survey, there were 194 respondents from the first survey, and 120 respondents from the second survey which is approximately 300 responses in total. In response to Mason's question regarding next steps, Demkowicz stated that City staff has outlined and provided guidance in Section IV the programs section of the Housing Element. Within the next three (3) years, staff will be working on implementing the programs, refining them and looking to see what types of resources and other partnerships will need to be formed to achieve the City's allocation and ensure that there is compliance with Fair Housing laws. There will be a sequence of steps that will take place within this timeframe which will include public outreach and staff analysis as the overlay zones are created within The Tustin Market Place and Enderle Center and the TLSP is amended. Willkom To respond further to Mason's question regarding notification, Willkom added that the email blast reached over 10,000 subscribers. The post card mailings went out to over 29,000 Tustin residents and 3,400 Tustin businesses. Willkom also stated that what was before the Commission that evening was the policy document. The implementation action plan includes the amendment to the Specific Plan and also the creation of overlay zones on some of those sites identified within the report and will be brought to the Commission within the next three (3) years. The Minutes—Planning Commission September 14,2021 —Page 4 of 8 Commission will have the ability to review the zone change and Specific Plan amendments at that time. 6:55 .m. Opened the Public Hearin item. � p p 9 Willkom Willkom stated, for the record, City staff had received written comments (sent via email) from the Tustin Planning Partnership and the Kennedy Commission, which was provided to the Commission prior to the meeting. The last email was received at 6:03 p.m. Hurtado Hurtado added that no further input had been received. Kimberly Adams Ms. Kimberly Adams, representing the Tustin Planning Partnership (TPP) stated that TPP had been involved in the Housing Element planning j process and hoped that their recommendations were considered and adopted. Adams further commented that: TPP felt that the City's public participation efforts still lacked inclusion of the underserved, that a barrier for the development of affordable housing is opposition, the TPP agreed with HCD findings, TPP would like the City to support decision that affect 1 the most vulnerable, TPP will be steadfast in their commitment to support any proposed developments. Adams further commented that affordable housing should be a priority. Finally commented that the TPP recommends that the Draft Housing Element not be adopted until the appropriate changes recommended by HCD are incorporated and for meaningful public participation prior to adoption. Sheena Ms. Sheena Innocente representing TPP, concurred with Ms. Adams Innocente comments and agreed that the City should not adopt the draft Housing Element HCD's untiil all comments are addressed. Innocente described being a survivor of unstable housing. She stated that Tustin residents are deserving of affordable, stable and safe housing and states she supports inclusionary housing and equitable distribution of affordable housing throughout Tustin. Innocente commented she would like more public participation and more outreach to vulnerable communities. She also spoke of SB 10 legislation and stated that she would like the City to offer an incentive to developers who want to purchase single-family homes and turn them into multi-family housing and that single-family homeowners who want to convert their homes into multi-family homes should be given some type of incentive as well. She concluded that the City should help residents with FHA loans to incentivize that type of development and educate the "NIMBYs" about the detrimental impacts of unstable housing for children. Lisa Talmage Ms. Lisa Talmage representing the TPP, concurred with her colleagues' previous statements and commented about unaffordable housing, exclusionary zoning within the City that prevents people from living in the City and she emphasized the need for more public participation. She stated that the survey shows the majority of respondents were Minutes—Planning Commission September 14,2021 —Page 5 of 8 Lisa Talmage homeowners and that sending surveys to organizations that serve lower- income residents is not enough. She suggested making phone calls, __ setting up meetings, and offering a raffle. Hurtado Hurtado confirmed no additional public input was received. 7:07 p.m. Closed the Public Hearing item. Further discussion ensued as follows. Higuchi Per Higuchi, his final comments regarding the item generally included; RHNA and Sacramento are being "very heavy handed" and would like the RHNA process to be an opportunity to enhance the City of Tustin's livability and make it a standout city from the surrounding cities. With the last Housing Element plan, all of the housing was located in the TLSP and this update now includes areas outside of Legacy such as Enderle Center and The Tustin Market Place. The inclusion of The Tustin Market Place in the Housing Element mirrors the City of Irvine's Housing Element and their RHNA requirements. Good planning is looking ahead at how our neighboring cities are handling their RHNA requirements, such as Santa Ana. Santa Ana has a similar housing element site north of Red Hill Avenue which may have been a lost opportunity on the City's end to think about high density. He added his disappointment with the city-owned land along Newport Avenue and the 55 Freeway not being included in the City's suitable sites inventory along with the universal inclusion of all city-owned land or potential surplus property, which he viewed as a lost opportunity. a Higuchi further commented on the existing train station and how he would j have liked to see higher density housing products adjacent to the station C in order to benefit from local tax credits along with density bonuses that would have been triggered at the transit center with more uses there, (i.e. like San Diego and Los Angeles). He concluded by commending City staff on the project. Mello Mello echoed what Higuchi stated previously with regards to the land near the 55 Freeway and the transit center. Overall, he was happy with the responsiveness from the City Council and the Commission's comments to reallocating units. Mello stated he was in support of the overlays and the policy document. He was supportive of finding ways of making affordable housing available as Tustin continues to grow. Chu Chu thanked staff for the presentation and speakers for their input. She stated that addressing housing issues can be very challenging. Chu indicated that while the planning will not happen right away, the Commission does hear everyone's concerns. The Commission has to make tough decisions and there is a deadline to meet. Chu was in support of the draft Housing Element. Kozak Kozak thanked staff for the excellent work on the Housing Element update and indicated that he recognized housing is a very difficult issue to resolve Minutes=Planning Commission September 14,2021 —Page 6 of 8 to everyone's satisfaction given the restraints the City operates under. He stated that he was in support of the recommended action to move the item forward to the City Council. Mason Mason thanked the speakers for their input and agreed that everybody deserves safe and decent affordable housing. She thanked staff for their work gathering additional input and engagement with the public throughout the entire community. Mason concurred with Higuchi and Mello regarding the transportation center. She commented that the City is striving for progress versus perfection at this time. Mason indicated that she is in support of the item and that the discussion will continue over the next three (3) years. Mason encouraged everybody watching and who attended to continue the conversation. 7:19 p.m. Mason re-opened the Public Hearing item since there was another individual who wished to comment. a I Cesar Mr. Cesar Covarrubias, Kennedy Commission, stated that a letter had Covarrubias already been submitted to the Commission regarding their comments and that the main issue continues to be the creation of new housing opportunities, policies and programs to ensure that affordable housing gets built, especially on the sites identified for lower income. He also encouraged this at the sites at The Tustin Market Place and Enderle Center. j 7:20 p.m. Closed the Public Hearing. Motion It was moved by Mello, seconded by Higuchi, to adopt Resolution Nos. 4439 and 4440, as recommended. Motion carried 5-0. None. REGULAR BUSINESS: STAFF CONCERNS: Willkom Willkom recognized the hard work of both City staff and consultants on the Housing Element. She stated that at the last Council meeting, the City Council had the second reading on the Development Agreement/Ordinance approving the Red Hill Avenue mixed-use project. COMMISSION CONCERNS: Chu Chu commended staff and said she is looking forward to meeting everybody again. Higuchi Higuchi thanked staff and he is looking forward to the September 28, 2021 walking tour. Minutes—Planning Commission September 14, 2021 —Page 7 of 8 Mello Mello thanked staff for the agenda item and he looks forward to continuing working with City staff on the item. Kozak Kozak commended staff as well. Great road ahead of us while continuing to implement the Housing Element and he is looking forward to working with staff on the implementation. On August 26, 2021, Kozak participated in an online webinar given by California Preservation Foundation (CPF). Tustin Tiller Days will be held on October 2, 2021. Mason Mason also participated in the online webinar held by CPF on August 26, 2021. She was unable to participate on the September 9, 2021 parking meeting and requested an access to the link to the meeting, if available. Mason closed the meeting in honor of the 20th anniversary of 9/11. She recognized all of those who served our country and those serving in the Middle East. A reminder to all to appreciate the military service men and women. 7:26 p.m. ADJOURNMENT: The next regular meeting of the Planning Commission is scheduled for Tuesday, September 28, 2021. —'/ AM tO Chairpers n—' JU&INA L. VVILLKOM k7 Planning Commission Secretary Minutes—Planning commission September 14, 2021 —Page 8 of 8